"The Arizona Cardinals have reduced their trade demands..."

by Cody K on Apr 24, 2009 3:12 PM EDT Comment 14 comments

Sweet!! Make this happen, J.R.!

The Arizona Cardinals have reduced their trade demands for disgruntled receiver Anquan Boldin to a second-round pick in Saturday's draft and other considerations and are talking to at least three teams who seem to be newly interested, two sources told EPSN's Sal Paolantonio on Friday.

The New York Jets, New York Giants and Philadelphia Eagles have expressed interest given the downgraded demands from a first- and third-round pick, the sources said.

Cardinals general manager Rod Graves and coach Ken Whisenhunt jhad repeatedly emphasized at the team's pre-draft news conference Tuesday that they would be happy to keep Boldin and eventually try to sign him to a new contract.

"Quite a few teams have called but we have no offers from those teams," Graves said Tuesday. "Anything can evolve from this point through draft day so that's where it is right now."

Boldin expressed extreme displeasure with his contract in last season's training camp, accusing Cardinals management of failing to follow through on a promise of a new deal and vowing never to re-sign with Arizona.

Still, he went on to have his third Pro Bowl season in six years in the NFL as the Cardinals advanced to the Super Bowl.

"I didn't say a trade was necessary," Boldin said last week. "I just want something to get resolved. It's something that's gone on long enough."

FanPosts are written by community members. This is simply a way for community members to express opinions too long to be contained in a comment.

0 recs | Comment 14 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

link

Whoops, forgot to attach – here is the link to the article:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4096399

by Cody K on Apr 24, 2009 3:13 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

GIVE IT TO EM!

Can we just go and give that 2nd pick to them right now and maybe even attach a 5th Rounder for good measure. Jesus H this deal better be locked up asap.

by jsballer3314 on Apr 24, 2009 3:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

This has been a crazy off-season. I’m just glad that all (or most) of this speculation will end after tomorrow. Of course it would be nice if the Giants end up with a stud receiver by that time.

by XLII on Apr 24, 2009 3:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

It's not the off-season that's crazy, it's us.

The offseason only seems crazier because people have more opportunities to speculate about speculations.

by mymanren on Apr 24, 2009 4:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Geez

If you can get Boldin for a No. 2 instead of Edwards for a 1 & 3 you have to do that. But, still, a lot of posturing.

by Ed Valentine on Apr 24, 2009 7:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I still don't know about Boldin

Not really the player or this deal, cuz it would be perfect to give up a 2nd for him, maybe even that 5th just to seal it. THat would be perfect as far as that’s concerned.

But the contract is what worries me. $10+ mill for a guy with injury concerns, not to mention stats that mainly result from a pass happy system. Yea he gets 1000 yards, but look at how many catches he gets. A receiver getting 100 catches with the Giants, or anywhere close, just will never happen.

by FreeBradshaw on Apr 24, 2009 9:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Why would you be worried

What’s 10 million to the giants? this guy has been a pro bowler 3xs already, is durable and strong. If they can steal him for a 2nd and another late pick its a home run. Its the right move and the best move.

by JonLands on Apr 25, 2009 12:08 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

10+Mill

probably isn’t much to the Giants, and it really isn’t much to me either. Yea he’s a Pro Bowler and puts up numbers, but again look at their system in Arizona. They throw the ball more than the Giants run the ball, and they’ve been doing that for a while.

Bolding would not get the 90+ catchers he gets per year with the Giants. The Giants run the ball a whole lot, and if one WR gets 90 catches it would mean that Eli is targeting one guy again, and I frickin hate that.

DOn’t get me wrong, I like Boldin, I even like Braylon Edwards. I just like when Eli spreads the ball around and I don’t think getting one of these guys is going to force him to do so.

by FreeBradshaw on Apr 25, 2009 8:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Probably right

But it would be great to have that threat. Percy Harvin? Hakeem Nicks, as rookies will have little or no impact. The Giants are built for winning now and spreading the field a little bit more with a game breaker sounds better to me.I heard Heyward-Bey mentioned also. Big risk there. I would even love Edwards at this point.

by JonLands on Apr 25, 2009 8:07 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't think its a definite taht these guys will have little impact

Especially if Rees doesn’t up the ante for Edwards or Boldin, it means that they are set with Hixon and Smith and also Manningham as the WR. Its not such a bad thing, especially with Boss also probably more involved.

DHB and Nicks may not have immediate impact, but what about Jeremy Maclin?? Yea, Nicks may have better hands, but Maclin’s hands really aren’t questioned so Id think he can catch the ball. He could immedately come in and return kicks and punts all the while he learns the offense and gets eased in there.

THe Giants really don’t need a gamebreaker at WR. many times even having Burrress on the field was the team’s downfall, he wasn’t always so great.

by FreeBradshaw on Apr 25, 2009 8:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I disagree

When Burress was there, most teams tried to double up. If they didn’t he could beat most guys in single coverage, I don’t think Manninham will be the guy but I hope i’m wrong. Maclin will not be there. They may have no other choice but to take one of these other guys. I would love a USC linebacker with their 2nd pick but i think they may be gone by then

by JonLands on Apr 25, 2009 8:32 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I say Maclin

cuz if they trade up, I think its for him and not for DHB.

Yea most teams tried to double Burress. Even so, there were games far and few between, games like the Green Bay game and game one last year against the Skins, where Burress was actually a gamebreaker.

Don’t get me wrong, Id love for Burress mess to have never happened. I just think that the idea that a veteran WR is what the Giants need, and that a rookie WR is not going to have an impact is wrong.

I know the rook will Not have anywhere close to Burress impact, but the Giants need to gameplan differently to overcome that. This is what they failed to do at least offensively and the end of last season, coupled with the D-Line getting tired.

by FreeBradshaw on Apr 25, 2009 10:23 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

"the Giants need to gameplan differently to overcome that."

I think this is my fundamental difference with you over this draft. I think your analysis is very good, but you assume the Giants can do what you mentioned above. Unfortunately, I don’t think Brian Gilbride has that ability – I think he’s a one-trick pony. Sometimes it works (see, 2007-08), and sometimes it doesn’t (post-Plax). But I don’t think he’s gonna change his philosophy, and that worries me.

by cjmulrain on Apr 25, 2009 7:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I guess I should add

"""SHOULD""" cuz I know as much as you that Gilbride is uninventive. If there was a """bad""" thing that resulted from winning the SB, its that Gilbride gets a free pass for so long.

I never liked Gilbride, I think that if he was 200lbs heavier he’d be Andy Reid if he liked to run the ball.

by FreeBradshaw on Apr 25, 2009 9:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs